Stay Ahead of Compliance with Monthly Citation Updates


In your State Survey window and need a snapshot of your risks?

Survey Preparedness Report

One Time Fee
$79
  • Last 12 months of citation data in one tailored report
  • Pinpoint the tags driving penalties in facilities like yours
  • Jump to regulations and pathways used by surveyors
  • Access to your report within 2 hours of purchase
  • Easily share it with your team - no registration needed
Get Your Report Now →

Monthly citation updates straight to your inbox for ongoing preparation?

Monthly Citation Reports

$18.90 per month
  • Latest citation updates delivered monthly to your email
  • Citations organized by compliance areas
  • Shared automatically with your team, by area
  • Customizable for your state(s) of interest
  • Direct links to CMS documentation relevant parts
Learn more →

Save Hours of Work with AI-Powered Plan of Correction Writer


One-Time Fee

$49 per Plan of Correction
Volume discounts available – save up to 20%
  • Quickly search for approved POC from other facilities
  • Instant access
  • Intuitive interface
  • No recurring fees
  • Save hours of work
F0604
D

Failure to Assess Bolsters as Potential Restraint

Beaver Falls, Pennsylvania Survey Completed on 08-22-2025

Penalty

No penalty information released
tooltip icon
The penalty, as released by CMS, applies to the entire inspection this citation is part of, covering all citations and f-tags issued, not just this specific f-tag. For the complete original report, please refer to the 'Details' section.

Summary

The facility failed to identify and assess the use of bolsters as a potential physical restraint for a resident. According to the facility's own restraint policy, any device that restricts a resident's freedom of movement and cannot be easily removed by the resident should be evaluated as a possible restraint. In this case, a resident with a history of falls, decreased safety awareness, altered cognition, and impulsivity was observed lying in bed with bolsters on both sides. The resident's care plan included the use of bilateral bolsters and other fall prevention interventions, but there was no documentation of an assessment or ongoing evaluation to determine if the bolsters functioned as a restraint for this individual. Review of the clinical record and staff interviews confirmed that the facility did not conduct the required comprehensive review or use the Enabler Restraint Observation tool to assess whether the bolsters restricted the resident's movement. Additionally, there was no evidence that the interdisciplinary team evaluated the risks and benefits, considered alternatives, or involved the resident and family in decision-making regarding the use of bolsters. This lack of assessment and ongoing evaluation was acknowledged by the DON during the survey process.

An unhandled error has occurred. Reload 🗙